The Israeli bridge helped 1973 to first crossing of Suez Canal "Operation Gazelle"

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The Israeli bridge helped 1973 to first crossing of Suez Canal "Operation Gazelle"

[LEFT]Military history includes lots of surprises , not only in its later known "details", but also about the developments of specific actions during
the flow of war and their impacts on history.[/LEFT]

[LEFT]Following are some of the available photos, about the Israeli Bridge, (a unique construction) , which was prepared long time before the crossing (even prior to the 1973 Yom Kippur war), as now known and is published .

Sure, there are and will be more photos to be published, of this unique military bridge, which impacts, have contributed to change history in the middle east [/LEFT]

[LEFT]It was used by general Ariel Sharon , to cross the Suez Canal (at the Temsah Lake) on the night of 19th - 20th October 1973[/LEFT]

[LEFT]Her had mentioned it in his book "Ariel Sharon , WARRIOR", but never published the photos, but another book had dealt with the topic in a
better and detaied matter.[/LEFT]

[LEFT]I have read an article some-time ago, in a military forum , that israel has
developed and improved this bridge, to enlighten its weight and improve its field maneuverabilty, meet with the modern battlefield requirements
and to make it a global military equipment for "export".[/LEFT]

[LEFT]It is useful to read , what general Sharon had published about the problems, they faced , not only to transport that bridge across the last section of Sinai desert but also when and how they moved it across the Suez Canal , from the eastern to the western bank .[/LEFT]

It is unique in the structuring and implementation, though General Sharon has written about the difficulties they faced to roll it over the last section
near to the edge.

Remarkably, that no many photos :: if at all ... had been published about it, except newly , particularly the one, that shows the taknks that pulled
it

As we know, pontons had been sigle elements, which are mounted on their transporting vehicle ... either tank or simlar..

It would be great , to have the feed back ....

In all cases, it was successful and the Aerial reconaisance, failed to discover it, though it was there months prior to the Yom Kippur war, as the Israelis have ─presumingly─ planned to cross the canal at that point
for many several enviromental reasons, that make the crossing easier

I have some doubts. If that bridge was prepared a few months before Yom Kippur war and it definitely wasn't any kind of defensive hardware - was that war defensive or aggressive from the Israeli point of view?

I have some doubts. If that bridge was prepared a few months before Yom Kippur war and it definitely wasn't any kind of defensive hardware - was that war defensive or aggressive from the Israeli point of view?

Actually, you draw the attention to many points and raise a douple of questions

- If you doubt, that the bridge was THERE , lng time, prior to the crossing, then it is advisable to refer to the books mentioned and particularly to Gen. Sharon book

- If you doubt, the reason "why" it wasnt discovered by the Egyptian Air Reconaisance missions ... or Soviet espionage satalites .... so this is something else

2 - Regarding, consider the bridge, as not a defense HW, this is a good argument ... but it makes us come back to your first doubts remark

It is piculiar .... and no camouflage would have hidden it , particularly its
dimesions are huge ... and moving it across the last section to the yard, prepared for the crossing, raise additional questions and strengthens your doubts whatever they are

I have some doubts. If that bridge was prepared a few months before Yom Kippur war and it definitely wasn't any kind of defensive hardware - was that war defensive or aggressive from the Israeli point of view?

Every army needs to be prepared for every possible scenario and in case of another conflict with Egypt, it was quite obvious that it will be required to cross into Africa in order to subdue Egypt. doesn't really take a genius to figure that one out, correct?

If you are implying that the Arabs made a preemptive strike then you are going even against the Arab point of view of the war, where they have stated thier goals of taking back their lost land from the 1967 Six Day war.

You are also forgeting that the two sides didn't exactly sit peacefully for six years between the two wars, there was an attrition war in between, with both sides conducting raids.

Every army needs to be prepared for every possible scenario and in case of another conflict with Egypt, it was quite obvious that it will be required to cross into Africa in order to subdue Egypt. doesn't really take a genius to figure that one out, correct?

If you are implying that the Arabs made a preemptive strike then you are going even against the Arab point of view of the war, where they have stated thier goals of taking back their lost land from the 1967 Six Day war.

You are also forgeting that the two sides didn't exactly sit peacefully for six years between the two wars, there was an attrition war in between, with both sides conducting raids.

You are quite right

If "Eye" , would explain his points of views, it will definately assist shaping
an additional sccene

What is not understandable

1 - Why didnt the EG-Airforce discover that bridge befor its crossing

2 - Why wasnt it discovered, when thex first crossed the Suez Canal and had overcome the Bar Lev line ...

It was in the vinicity of the nearby so called Chinese Farm

You are right, regarding the 3 years War of Attrition fightings .... (July 1967 - Augst 1970)

I shall publish , some deparate topics about some of them

Dr. Yahia Al Shaer

Originally Posted by EyeI have some doubts. If that bridge was prepared a few months before Yom Kippur war and it definitely wasn't any kind of defensive hardware - was that war defensive or aggressive from the Israeli point of view?

I'm not implying anything. I'm just surprised a little bit. I have always heard that Yom Kippur war was started by unprovoked strike made by Arab countries and suddenly we have that complicated hardware. Hardware which could be useful only for somebody, who would plan to attack Egypt. It's ready to use months before war. Of course quite good explanation can be theory that attack is the best defence.
But it could also be that Egyptians knew about that bridge and that knowledge made them a bit more aggressive.

Don't take it offensive. It's just interesting to find out about something from first hand.

I'm not implying anything. I'm just surprised a little bit. I have always heard that Yom Kippur war was started by unprovoked strike made by Arab countries and suddenly we have that complicated hardware. Hardware which could be useful only for somebody, who would plan to attack Egypt. It's ready to use months before war. Of course quite good explanation can be theory that attack is the best defence.
But it could also be that Egyptians knew about that bridge and that knowledge made them a bit more aggressive.

Don't take it offensive. It's just interesting to find out about something from first hand.

No worry,

It is an exchanging of thoughts and points of view ...

Be sure, that , there is no need for being offended , because we tray to find an understandable explanation during the course of our discussions

Not even, the slightest thought, that you are implying, alledging or assuming any thing.

Now to the facts ...

The bridge, had been there for months, prior the Yom Kippur... this means, that there had been a serious "planned intention" to cross the Suez Canal.

Taking into condsideration , the high costs to design, make and move the bridge, does imply ... an eventual crossing ...

This had not been a "Hit and Run" plan, but a steady intention to cross and secure the units , who will be the Bridge Heads .

Practiacally, a planned swift penetration and engulfing , destroying the defending missile wall , errected on the western side of the Suez Canal

In short, an operation to penetrate and occupy the area around the huge devresoir military base, after they have had implemented a quick preemptive attak and destroy helilanding.

Therefore, it is no wonder, that other thoughts, would pop up .. gradually due to recent images of different phases of that war

The question ... or assumption ... or doubts .... and thoughts ...

Was it really a surprise on Yom Kippur , or ist it possibly a preplanned and long term calculated "limited war", to finish the old status and bring peace to the area .... ????

Honestly, I am tending to accept that idea ...

Give every one , what they need of a cake ... Egypt a limited victory , Israel a calculated defeat, then turn the course .... then stop the war by USA as the strongest power to move things ahead in the area .. opposite to Russia ...

Then get USSR out of the Middle East .... and establish a new order, that will be followed, by a geochange of the map.

Limited sacrifice and loss of lives , for a definate peace between Egypt and Israel , which would be followed by other Arab states

I'm not implying anything. I'm just surprised a little bit. I have always heard that Yom Kippur war was started by unprovoked strike made by Arab countries and suddenly we have that complicated hardware. Hardware which could be useful only for somebody, who would plan to attack Egypt. It's ready to use months before war. Of course quite good explanation can be theory that attack is the best defence.
But it could also be that Egyptians knew about that bridge and that knowledge made them a bit more aggressive.

Don't take it offensive. It's just interesting to find out about something from first hand.

Israeli conventional doctrine has always been "offensive", take the battle to the enemy, behind enemy lines as soon as possible. Yom Kippur was a surprise attack, but I'm not sure even the most jaded Israeli would call it unprovoked; we were sitting on about 60,000 square kilometers of Egyptian territory. That would provoke me were I Egyptian.

Israeli doctrine here should have been - absorb the blow, use the space and suck them in.

It's importent to note that Sharon's division had already crossed and established a bridghead (using Pontoon bridges and Gillois amphibious tank-carriers) by the time this bridge, known as the 'Roller Bridge' (Gesher Haglilim), was in place (thus widening the bridgehead).

[LEFT]

I have read an article some-time ago, in a military forum , that israel hasdeveloped and improved this bridge, to enlighten its weight and improve its field maneuverabilty, meet with the modern battlefield requirements and to make it a global military equipment for "export".

True...

Improved 'Roller Bridge' used during a military exercise last year.[/LEFT]

I have some doubts. If that bridge was prepared a few months before Yom Kippur war and it definitely wasn't any kind of defensive hardware - was that war defensive or aggressive from the Israeli point of view?